Got Spirit? question 168
This one came into tentpegsquestion@yahoo.com and while it is a long question, it is an important one. I invite comments, as always, and ask that discussion of this be free, irenic (that means kind, peaceable, and loving, by the way), and pithy (that means “brief”).
Hi Mr. Mead, I’ve been keeping up with your Tentpegs blog for a while now, and really appreciate your insight. I decided to submit a question to which I’ve long struggled to find a viable answer, and would very much appreciate your perspective. Please forgive me if it’s too long of a question.
In our CofC tribe, I’ve long been taught that we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit upon our baptism. I accept and believe the texts and reasoning used for this position. However, as I was studying baptism some years back, particularly the conversion stories and baptisms in the book of Acts, I noticed (unless I’m reading these passages incorrectly) that on at least two of the occasions recorded, God provided the Holy Spirit prior to and/or separately from the baptism:
* Cornelius’ household in Acts 10 – the Spirit was clearly upon the people before their baptism; in fact, it seems that Peter may have seen their gift of the Holy Spirit as a validation that they should indeed be baptized;
* The twelve in Ephesus in Acts 19 – the Spirit was given at Paul’s placing of his hands upon them, presumably separately from their re-baptism into the name of Jesus.
I guess my question is: Does God provide the Holy Spirit apart from baptism today, at least in some cases? If so, that seems to open the door to the possibility that an unbaptized believer could possess the Holy Spirit, and presumably eternal life as well. While I wholeheartedly believe that believers should and need to be water baptized (too much evidence of it in scripture to believe otherwise), is it reasonable to fellowship, as believers, individuals who profess Jesus and exhibit fruits of the Spirit, even though they may have never been baptized?
I do believe God, in His sovereignty, could accept unbaptized believers, as He knows their hearts; but I could not personally, in good conscience, claim it to be unnecessary or unimportant, nor could I leave it out of any evangelistic teaching. In my observation, most genuine seekers that come to belief have little or no problem with baptism. And yet, I’ve also observed some folks who seem to clearly have come to faith and who are visibly “converted”, though have not yet taken the step of baptism.
Over the years, I’ve asked several folks whose opinions I trust about this, specifically the Holy Spirit question, and get anything from some stammering response, to a glib “that was for Bible times, specific to the Apostles”. The text about prophecy and tongues ceasing (1 Corinthians 13, I believe) is most often cited as to the reason some things no longer operate today as they did in Biblical times (i.e. tongues, laying on of hands, etc.). I’ve long accepted this, but now question that belief, because in my own prayerful study, simply reading the Word for what it says, I’m not seeing this connection. It seems we’ve used this passage to dismiss many things that we either don’t understand, or are uncomfortable with. As an aside, I’m seeing that we miss out on a great richness to our relationship with the Lord by simply dismissing topics we don’t understand.
As mentioned, my [somewhat unsettled] tendency is to believe that God is great enough to accept a genuine, albeit unbaptized, believer. However that puts me way outside of my tribe-let of believers, which is often a lonely place; hence, your perspective would be much appreciated, as I do not seek an answer to assume a particular position, but rather I’m seeking to get more settled in my own heart between the Lord and me about these things.
We always need to differentiate between the gift of the Holy Spirit and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. However, while we draw that line, we need to be careful that we are not trying to reduce that which cannot be reduced!
Upon baptism, we are promised that the Holy Spirit will live in us in the same way that the Father and Son live in us. The Spirit leads us, convicts us of sin, and directs us toward living out God’s will. In some people, in some places, in some times, the Spirit gave gifts to help them understand who God was or to help them tell others who God was (and is!).
Kami giving me a gift is not the same as me receiving Kami AS a gift. When we read these passages it seems that Christians are absolutely promised the Holy Spirit as a gift… and that God can give that same gift to those who believe but who have not yet been baptized. I agree with the questioner — I see many fruits of the Spirit in believers who do not agree with my understanding of baptism. I am not prepared to moderate my teaching of the importance of baptism, but it would be ignorance or dishonesty to deny that others — some of whom disagree with me — often outrun me in spirituality, grace, and love.
I believe that God can give a gift to whomever He wants, without my permission, even if it plays havoc with my theology! I believe that because I see it. Often.
Sometimes, God gave miraculous gifts of the Spirit to individuals or groups so that they could attest to the truth of the Word preached, or so that they could reach previously unreached groups (miraculous learning of language, for example), or so that they could continue to stay alive long enough to spread the Gospel. We are NEVER commanded to receive or ask for those gifts. We ARE commanded to pray that God fill us with His Spirit.
You see, while the miracles are flashy and cool and very, very handy, we must always remember that the higher gift, the more important gift, is that of the Spirit Himself. His presence is a greater gift than tongues or healings, and we are told that we will absolutely receive His presence when we are baptized. While you might be able to receive Him in other manners, none of those are guaranteed or suggested by any writer in scripture.
April 16th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
So, how is it then that we have no record of the disciples/apostles ever having been baptized? You’d think that as the role models for the church to come, they’d all go through it and that it would be recorded. And yet scripture makes not a single mention of this. Why?
April 16th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Two things: 1) I’ve always differintated between the manifestation of the Holy Spirit (i.e. speaking in tongues, performing miracles, etc.) and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (i.e. the Spirit of God residing inside of us, being saved).
There are tons of Scriptures I can give you to back this up, but since Patrick asked to keep comments brief I’ll honor that.
2) Not everyone who had the manifestation of the Spirit was saved. Case in point: Judas.
Judas performed miracles – the Holy Spirit manifested Himself through him, but in the end he handed Jesus over to be crucified.
April 16th, 2009 at 11:37 pm
“Upon baptism, we are promised that the Holy Spirit will live in us in the same way that the Father and Son live in us.”
Firstly, we need to define just what the Holy Spirit is, and therefore define the “GIFT” that we receive from him at baptism.
Chris I believe the bible tells us Jesus baptized the apostles himself. correct me if I am wrong.
Laymond, the language is plain that the gift at baptism IS the Holy Spirit and is not just a gift from him. Also, the Bible is silent on the subject of the apostle’s baptism though, as baptism is part of the Great Commission and is, therefore, included in the “all I have commanded you”, they had to have been baptized. They might have been baptized by John the Baptist, but it is more likely that they were baptized along with 3000 others on the Day of Pentecost.
April 17th, 2009 at 4:10 am
Our preacher is starting a series this Sunday on the 7 miracles from John’s gospel. I’m very curious just how he is going to handle this subject. Good post, Patrick.
April 17th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Patrick, as you have confessed you are not always right.Never wrong, but not always right.
Neither of what you said is as “cut and dried” as you think.
Jn:4:1: When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
Jn:4:2: (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Jesus baptized his students, would that not include the apostles?
Jn:4:10: Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
Read what you wrote, Laymond! “Jesus himself baptized not”
April 17th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
As baptism was something that many rabbis practiced, it is likely that the disciples were baptized. If Jesus was baptized by John, and a rabbi’s disciples did everything they could to be like the rabbit (and indeed they did), it seems extremely likely that they were baptized in the same manner that Jesus was (without the dove, though ).
Now, think of what we know of the apostles. Does it seem likely that they would have commanded people to do what they had not done? Hardly.
April 17th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Patrick, please explain,
Jn:3:22: After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
I don’t believe this says he tarried, while they baptized, or does it? in your opinion.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Patrick,
My, you are edgy! I admire men who pursue truth and embrace it.
The founders of the Restoration Movement held the exact position you do. (I posted the quotes some time ago).
It was Peter who uttered the works in Acts 2:38 and it was Peter who twice in Acts stated plainly that he received the Holy Spirit when he believed. One can argue that his belief was similtanous with his baptism but that is a stretch in my view.
Based on Jesus’ teaching, I think most people who enter the baptisty are saved before they get in the water it they are really trusting in Jesus.
Royce
April 17th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
OK Patrick, instead of asking you to figure this out, here is my understanding of this event. as we know John spoke the truth, so he didn’t say in one place that Jesus did baptize, then in another he said he did not. In Jn:3:22 he said Jesus did baptize. In Jn:4:2 John said he didn’t baptize anyone except his disciples. (In my opinion)so who do you think Jesus was baptizing at Judaea?
Jn:3:22: After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
Jn:4:2: (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
IMO but = except
April 17th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Laymond the more clear understanding of the text is that Jesus was not doing the baptizing but His disciples were doing it. However, to be clear, this speaks to what Jesus was doing during this phase of His ministry, it does not say whether or not He had baptized them, or John did, or whether they baptized each other. Other than Paul, we just don’t know when or by whom the apostles were baptized.
April 18th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Uh … taking a slight detour back to the original question ….
Luke 1:15 describes John the Baptist as “filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth.” David begs, in Psalm 51, for God not to take His Holy Spirit from him. I realize that these are pre-Pentecost items, but there is ample evidence to me that God gives His Spirit to whom He wills – and removes it (as was the case with Saul – 1 Samuel 6:14).
In John 16:8, Jesus says that the Holy Spirit (he) will come and “convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment.” Correct my logic if I’m wrong … but wouldn’t the Holy Spirit have to have some sort of communication with a person of the world in order to convict him/her of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment? As far as I know, He wasn’t handing out printed Bibles before at least AD 1600 … is that solely what this statement refers to?
April 18th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
I definitely agree that God may save and give gifts to anyone he wants, however I don’t understand why there’s so much debate about baptism. Jesus did it intending for us to follow, and the symbolism of being buried with Christ and rising again is powerful. The arguments for its importance for salvation and the gift of the spirit are strong, but even without those I don’t see why someone would want to follow Jesus but not want to be baptized.
April 19th, 2009 at 4:54 am
When we see “fruit” of the Spirit in lives of unbelievers as well as un-immersed believers we must either give credit to God or Satan for the presence of those traits. I choose to glorify God that He can bear fruit in any soil. I do not equate the influence of the Spirit with salvation. However advanced spiritually an unimmersed individual may seem I consider him to not yet be in the kingdom. I can still glorify God for His power to influence anyone through His Spirit inside or without the kingdom. We blur the teaching when we assume everyone of “great spirituality” has the Spirit dwelling within as a seal of salvation. That gift is reserved (atleast by scripture) for the faithful immersed.
As far as the apostles are concerned, if Jesus could “speak” men’s sins forgiven He could also “speak” the apostles into the kingdom. I don’t know if they were immersed along with the 3,000, but they did speak in tongues by the influence of the Spirit before their assumed baptisms. I believe this is why Peter could say what happened to Cornelius was identical to what happened to them (and thus an anomaly as well.)
April 20th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Laymond,
If you’d move beyond the KJV you wouldn’t talk yourself into these bizarre positions based upon archaic English sentence construction.
“But” in Jn 4:2 never means “except for”. It means “instead” or “however”. The phrase you are looking for, that would mean “Jesus did not baptize, except for his disciples,” appears in Matthew 19:9 — “except for ‘porneia’”.
When a graduate assistant teaches a class at a college, or grades tests, etc. in the place of a professor, the students still get credit for having been in the professor’s class. Likewise, John is making clear that either Jesus got a reputation for baptizing when it was his disciples all along, or else Jesus stopped baptizing when it became a stumbling block to his redefinition of the Messianic vocation (cf. Paul in 1 Cor 1:14, another setting where baptism itself was becoming a stumbling block).
I believe the disciples that followed John prior to the baptism of Jesus were baptized by John. Those that came after may have been baptized by Jesus. However, they definitely received the indwelling Holy Spirit before Jesus ascended (Jn 20:22).
Mark Moore has constructed a pithy outline discussing this issue here: http://markmoore.org/resources/essays/loc/spiritbaptism.pdf
An even better essay by Mark Moore on the same topic is here: http://markmoore.org/resources/essays/acts/spiritbaptism.pdf